About your Search

20120926
20121004
Search Results 0 to 8 of about 9 (some duplicates have been removed)
about civil-rights. the second part of your question, how did he get kennedy -- it takes a lot of pages in this book to talk about all the things he does but the thing he does on the instant, this bill appears to be totally dead. he says didn't someone file a discharge petition? discharge petition had been filed -- this bill was in a committee that was never going to let it out. wasn't even the senate. still in the house rules committee which was shared by judge howard w. smith and would even give a date. the bill was going nowhere. johnson remembers someone filed a discharge petition to take away from that committee. that was -- a discharge petition ever -- never passed. violation of house rules and no president had ever gotten behind one before. johnson calls the representative who introduces it and representative of missouri has been told by the leaders dropped this thing and listen to johnson in this telephone call to see a genius in human nature because the first half of the call, we can't violate the house pre ♪ >> this is book tv's live coverage of the national books s festival
program, civil-rights and everyone of his major -- was stalled by the southern committee chairman who controlled congress, to see him get that program up and running and has it, ramming it through. to watch lyndon johnson do that in the first weeks after kennedy's assassination is a lesson in what a president can do if he not only knows all the levers to pull but has the will. in lyndon johnson's case almost vicious drive to do it, to win, to say over and over again as i am always saying to myself when i do the research look what he is doing. look what he is doing here. i don't say i succeeded but i tried to explain that in my books. to me, to see him doing that is something that is not only fascinating but revelatory given true insight into how power works in washington. there is another reason i don't get tired of doing these books on lyndon johnson. you are always learning something new. that goes even if what you are researching is something that has been written about a thousand or ten thousand times already as the case in the centerpiece of this book, the assassination of presid
to get ahead of things, the plaintiffs here are attorneys, civil rights activists and others who are in regular contact with people overseas particularly people who might well be the subject of electronic surveillance by the federal government and they are challenging the law that allows electronic surveillance, this wiretapping because they're concerned that their case will be picked up. they're claiming to have standing to challenge this law because even though the surveillance might be directed overseas to people they're talking to get their dedication will get picked up in the course of that surveillance and so therefore they have the right to challenge it in court. that is the standing issue we we are dealing with. just to get to the merits for a minute, and the aftermath of the exposÉ in the mid-70's about various abuses in the intelligence community and in short in short is set up a system by which the executive branch would have to go to the court surveillance court here in d.c. and get permission when they wanted to do wiretapping for national security purpose to give s
, engaged the senators in discussion of how he felt about the issues, and it became clear he felt the civil rights act, a thomas just think, he thought there was no such thing as a right to privacy to the constitution, and the senate by a vote of 58-42 said to conservative and he was voted down. ronald reagan nominated instead to that seat anthony kennedy, who was serving a liberal but was certainly no robert bork either. and he has had a long and distinguished career as, now the swing vote on the court. and that really, that set, that really set up the rehnquist years. accord which i wrote about in my last book, "the nine," and when i started looking at the supreme court in a serious way as a writer, i was inspired by book that i'm sure is familiar to many of you called the brethren by scott armstrong and bob woodward, really a great book, first real behind the scenes book of the supreme court. and 15, the theme of the book was also justices, regardless of politics couldn't stand were in burger. they thought he was at pompous jerk. that sort of contention has been the rule more than the ex
these cases can be so big they can be exported. civil-rights concerned about cutting back on class-action. too expensive to litigate each case one by one. the justices in the comcast case will consider the question of how much judges should decide about the case before certifying and saying everyone can be in all the lawsuits together. do they have to figure route if all these people and have one theory of damages or have to look at whether there was a fraud or securities fraud case so there will be more in line of the wal-mart decision about class-action procedure? two tiny actions. people in college try to get text books that are not incredibly expensive. the supreme court has a copyright case about what happens with market goods. text books made overseas when sold at a lower price are imported to the united states. producer of that book or any other copyrighted material have a right to limit it coming into the united states and actually a body on the questions of when a lawsuit is moved. a very lawyer the the the the issue but those who are interested and are practicing lawyers there are fi
was the attorney for the american civil liberties union. the judge would say, all right. we're going to have an argument on that point of law. parents to you want to come back into my office. leyritz was sick, no, let arthur and of that. i don't do that. earlier in his career, i don't know how many of you had to read but the author was an attorney. he became the legal partner. most of the legal brief writing, when they had to go into the appeals court was done by masters. there is a whole chapter about their very famous falling got and the incredible spite they had for each other for the rest of their lives. they were both very greedy, womanizers, and both convinced that they were literary men thrown into the wrong profession and what they really needed was peace and quiet that the other one make all the money so i can retreat to my office or write poetry and novels. it is a great untold story of american legal history. >> did daryl ever get involved in politics and endorsed any candidates, though i expect a candid it might not want his endorsement. >> one of the exciting things i found when
it was strengthening our economy that we defend the civil liberties and rights of every new hampshire citizens because we want to attract people of talent and energy to our states. that means defending our marriage equality law and making sure that women can chart their own destiny by making their own health care decisions .. i love the public debate between you and ovide lamontagne. has been on social issues. any that you disagree and, how much impact they have on the economy and the impact -- business of new hampshire? hassan: i was on a plan last spring and i sat next to a young man who recruits for a major new hampshire business. he was telling me how important the marriage equality law that we passed was to his recruiting efforts because young people were more interested in coming to new hampshire to work here because we were committed to treating all of our granite staters the police. similarly for women the ability to make their own decisions about when to have families, about what kind of balance they want to seek in the workplace, finishing school, all of those things relate to their ability
of principles that we agree with with pakistan on afghanistan. i think neither of us want to see the civil war. we should find that basis. the question people are struggling with right now with the right mechanism in the bilateral relationship, but the right mechanism to pull people together to find those things we have in common. anyone in the last month or six weeks there've been developments i'm not privy to but i sense i'm moving ahead. per your question is a good one. we don't have, to my knowledge, we have not achieved the kind of meeting of minds on afghanistan that were going to need for this process up to 2014 and beyond 2014 to address. so it is an open question i agree if there is a tough one, that is the. i'm an independent consultant and i have a couple of questions that pick up on other points that i believe you made. if i understood you correctly, you really suggesting that we start our relations when people share our values. i'm sympathetic to that idea. i wanted first to make a comment, which many of those people in some sense identified with our values or goals are at least s
Search Results 0 to 8 of about 9 (some duplicates have been removed)

Terms of Use (10 Mar 2001)